From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Loic Dachary Subject: Re: Ceph backports Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2015 13:16:45 +0100 Message-ID: <54AA80AD.2010901@dachary.org> References: <54AA7B46.6090706@dachary.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="eoGdIGLDPTXKGa1Ij155aHXxOwpqcAP2B" Return-path: Received: from mail2.dachary.org ([91.121.57.175]:33624 "EHLO smtp.dmail.dachary.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753324AbbAEMQr (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Jan 2015 07:16:47 -0500 In-Reply-To: Sender: ceph-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: John Spray Cc: Ceph Development This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --eoGdIGLDPTXKGa1Ij155aHXxOwpqcAP2B Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 05/01/2015 13:03, John Spray wrote: > Sounds sane -- is the new plan to always do backports via this > process? i.e. if I see a backport PR which has not been through > integration testing, should I refrain from merging it? I think that's the idea, indeed. QE does the merge, when and if tests are= green. >=20 > John >=20 > On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 11:53 AM, Loic Dachary wrote:= >> Hi Ceph, >> >> I'm going to spend time to care for the Ceph backports (i.e. help redu= ce the time they stay in pull requests or redmine tickets). It should rou= ghly go as follows: >> >> 0. Developer follows normal process to land PR to master. Once complet= e and ticket is marked Pending Backport this process initiates. >> 1. I periodically polls Redmine to look for tickets in Pending Backpor= t state >> 2. I find commit associated with Redmine ticket and Cherry Picks it to= backport integration branch off of desired maintenance branch (Dumping, = Firefly, etc). (Note - patch may require backport to multiple branches) >> 3. I resolve any merge conflicts with the cherry-picked commit >> 4. Once satisfied with group of backported commits to integration bran= ch, I notifies QE. >> 5. QE tests backport integration branch against appropriate suites >> 6a. If QE is satisfied with test results, they merge backport integrat= ion branch. >> 6b. If QE is NOT satisfied with the test results, they indicate backpo= rt integration branch is NOT ready to merge and return to me to work with= original Developer to resolve issue and return to steps 2/3 >> 7. Ticket is moved to Resolved once backport integration branch contai= ning cherry-picked backport is merged to the desired mainteance branch(es= ) >> >> I'll first try to implement this semi manually and document / script w= hen convenient. If anyone has ideas to improve this tentative process, no= w is the time :-) >> >> Cheers >> >> -- >> Lo=C3=AFc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre >> --=20 Lo=C3=AFc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre --eoGdIGLDPTXKGa1Ij155aHXxOwpqcAP2B Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAlSqgK0ACgkQ8dLMyEl6F212iACgiY/eh8WkRniThJTWfgRWzHwK CT0An2r0P6BKo3pw44BvaVZdzqp7p8bS =UgNl -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --eoGdIGLDPTXKGa1Ij155aHXxOwpqcAP2B--